Porsche GB has announced it will seek a judicial review of London Mayor Ken Livingstone’s £25 ‘Congestion’ charge for cars emitting 225g/km or more of CO2, on the grounds that it is unfair, disproportionate and will not cut either congestion or emissions. A motor manufacturer has at last found the guts to stand up for itself against a deeply flawed ‘environmental’ policy.
Porsche have set up a judicial review website here.
London Mayor Ken Livingstone is planning to raise the congestion charge from just £8.00 a day to £25.00 for some vehicles from October, and remove the exemption for residents, meaning that some people will see their daily charge rise from just 80p a day to £25.00 a day.
The new rules will affect several hundred models and many makes of car – 33,000 cars daily in total. This includes many larger family cars such as larger people carriers.
Porsche believes this will be bad for London and intends to take legal action in the form of a Judicial Review to stop this. This is yet another tax on London and the motorist.
It is a disproportionately large, unfair increase.
• The over 200 per cent increase for non-residents is disproportionately large- it is a huge jump in one go that looks more like a political stunt to raise revenue for an inefficient system than considered action.
• The jump for people who actually live in the congestion zone is even higher. People who currently pay just 80p a day will now have to pay £25.00 a day – a massive and unexpected increase of over 3000 percent.
• This increase will hit a large proportion of families that drive people carriers – the sort of people who use one large car, rather than driving a series of smaller one
• It will cost nearly £6,000 per year for those people, whether resident or not, to drive in London every day. This is a massive additional cost that people would not have known they were going to have to face when they bought their car.
• Motorists in Britain already pay very high levels of fuel tax and road tax.
This is yet a further increase which will squeeze them even further.
It won’t benefit the environment.
• Despite Livingstone’s claims, the increased charge won’t make any meaningful difference to the environment. The CO2 saved in a whole year is the equivalent, at most, to just a few hours of emissions from Heathrow Airport.
• It risks just putting more cars on the road as families move from one large car to two or more smaller ones.
• The increased charge will not be dependent on actual usage. A person driving a few hundred yards in one of the affected cars would have to pay £25.00 a day, whilst someone driving a slightly smaller car all day long would get away with paying just £8.00, or just 80p if they are a resident.
It sends out the wrong message about London as a place to do business.
• When London is competing to become the world’s leading business centre, it sends out completely the wrong message and will make successful people look at other cities to locate.
• The increase will hit large numbers of ordinary small business people who also use their vehicles for work.
• It comes at a time when people are already concerned about the state of the economy and when business centres should be doing all they can to secure their position.
Porsche has written to the Mayor requesting that he review his plans to increase the congestion charge to £25.00 for some vehicles. If he refuses to think more about the plans, Porsche will formally apply to the High Court for a Judicial Review. Porsche is not prepared to sit by and watch a world class city indiscriminately damaged.
Porsche seem to be unaware of just how unfair and disproportionate the new tax is. The Stern report, commissioned by the Government, suggested that £44 per tonne is an appropriate level of taxation for CO2 emissions.
Motorists already pay over £240 per tonne of CO2 emitted – FIVE TIMES the level of the Stern recommendations – in fuel duty.
Ken Livingstone is going to charge those who live within the zone 3500 TIMES the amount of tax that Stern suggests is reasonable if they choose to own a car that creeps over the arbitrary thresholds for emissions.
Insult is added to injury when you realize that buyers of some brand new £40,000+ 4x4s won’t have to pay the £25 whilst some VW Beetle owners will.
London Taxis tend to be automatics, which all emit well over 225g/km and they don’t have to pay the charge at all!
£25 less 80p is £24.20 extra a day for a resident of the central zone for driving a car with “Band G” emissions (over 225 g/km).
The new BMW X5 3.0D will emit 213 g/km (Autocar report), whereas a 2003 VW Beetle Auto produces 228g/km (SMMT website) — 15 g/km more.
Based on 5 days a week, 52 weeks a year, the brand new BMW X5 owning resident will pay £208 per year to drive in London. The owner of a £4000 secondhand VW Beetle Auto will have to pay £6500 — over THIRTY times as much.
If they both do 10km a day inside the zone, the VW Beetle owner will have to pay £161,333 for every extra tonne of CO2 he emits over and above the X5 driver. 228-213=15g/km =150g for 10km = .00015 tonnes. £24.20/.00015 equals £161.333.
The Stern report suggested that £44 per tonne was the justifiable level of taxation to cover the alleged “damage” from carbon dioxide. The VW Beetle owner is therefore paying 3666 times this amount for his extra emissions over and above a BMW X5.
Newer versions of the VW Beetle all emit under 225 g/km
LTI TXII Auto taxi — emission rated at 243 g/km on www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk
Who wants a Porsche anyway – can you do 300 km/hr in central London.
They should hit all Por-shuh drivers with a poser and ponce tax.
The back seat is for amputees only. So how can you cart your mates around in that.
If I can’t have one nobody else can either. I want one. I want one. OK I’ll recant AGW if I can have one. Gimme gimme gimme.
I remember driving a V8 MGB through central London – great experience. But it was in the evening and it was in 1980.
This will be the tragedy of climate alarmism. Environmental legislation pushed through with the best of intentions but a lack of understanding of all the ramifications – biofuels spring to mind.
Not that I’m advocating fast, thirsty cars of course, I’m much too sober an individual these days…
With the 911 (the ultimate development of the 4 cylinder 356 which was based on the pre-war VW), Porsche had resisted faddishness in favour of principles that united clarity of structure with fitness for purpose to produce a drivers’ car and (IMHO) an enduring work of art.
“Driving in its purest form” as they called it.
The Cayenne Turbo, on the other hand, a vehicle of 2355 kg unladen weight, which can reach 275 km/h and does 0-100 in 5 seconds is ‘overkill’, perhaps more in the tradition of one of the company’s earlier all-terrain efforts: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_I
Ann Novek says
Found this ” poetry” reading a glossy paper at the dentist:
” Child of Hollywood
driving a red Porche
Happiness in a drawer
ten minutes away
Driving over a cliff
peace at last”
Paul Biggs says
This is not about Porsche – it’s about any car that emits over 225g/km CO2, which includes family cars. Porsche have had the guts to take on Red Ken. 224g/km = £8, 225g/km = £25. Crazy.
A profit like this, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/13/business/worldbusiness/13porsche.html (around $30,000 per vehicle, BMW makes about $3,200 per car, Audi nets $1,580, Volkswagen just $400) makes Porsche are a formidable advocate for motorists.
People living in Central London can keep their expensive cars for country trips etc, or for when they really need them, but for all those short trips the tax might make them consider either using feet, bike or public transport more often, or using car share companies or taxis. If your car is just over the 225 gms of CO2 limit, which is admittedly rather arbitrary, and should perhaps include fine particle emissions too and weight (maybe a point score system would be fairer) then you’ve got time to sell it and get something more fuel efficient, or maybe a garage can tweak it. Porsche’s claim that the tax wont do much to lower emissions may be partially true but if it reduces congestion and encourages use of bicycles and feet then it will have significant health and social benefits. See Velib projects in Paris, Barcelona, Lyons and elsewhere for how cities can change from auto dominated to more eco friendly places.